HomeArticleIn A Society Built On War, We Must Do More Than Just Prefer Peace

In A Society Built On War, We Must Do More Than Just Prefer Peace

American activist Angela Davis once said, “In a racist society it is not enough to be non-racist, we must be anti-racist.” Our responsibility to truth and justice isn’t fulfilled by merely witnessing the perverse tendency in western society toward white supremacy without participating in it, any more than our responsibility is fulfilled by merely witnessing but not participating in a gang rape. Simply choosing not to participate in a grave injustice while giving it our tacit permission to continue is insufficient, especially if the color of your skin gives you an advantage resulting from that injustice. This injustice must be forcefully opposed.

The same is true of war, which is the glue that holds together the empire which dominates our society.

There is a painfully common notion among leftists and progressives that it is perfectly acceptable to focus on domestic policy while de-emphasising the importance of foreign policy, or even ignoring foreign policy entirely. Politicians can generate immense support for themselves simply by promoting decent domestic policies while maintaining foreign policy that is not terribly distinct from the CIA/CNN mainstream consensus. I’m not as familiar with right-wing political circles, but I gather that libertarians and other right-leaning anti-interventionists often encounter a similar deprioritization of sane foreign policy.

War is the worst thing in the world. In terms of death, destruction and suffering caused to human beings, nothing else comes close: it’s just the absolute worst thing. It is worse than economic injustice. It is worse than racism. It is worse than sexism. It is worse than homophobia and transphobia. It is worse than draconian drug policies and immigration policies. All of those things are bad. War is worse. The politics of anyone who claims to care about people should reflect this.

If you don’t think that war is the worst thing in the world, it’s only because you haven’t looked closely enough at exactly what it is and how it works. Wars always necessarily involve not just mountains of human corpses, but lives ruined forever, bodies ripped apart, brains permanently destroyed by neurological trauma and minds permanently destroyed by psychological trauma, millions displaced from their homes, rape and slavery and human trafficking rising exponentially in the chaos, extremist factions rising to power and inflicting unspeakable evils on people. The suffering that is inflicted by every one of these military operations which get promoted by middle-aged men in DC think tanks in a casual tone of voice with the occasional joke mixed in, the suffering is literally unfathomable.

We live in a civilization that was built by war. A civilization that is currently propped up by war. A civilization that has its future mapped out with war as its career and war as its retirement plan. The political and economic system which dictates the way our society moves and operates has its roots sunk deep into the soil of war. The only thing separating us from the wars our government is waging in our name is physical proximity.

In such a society, it is not enough to merely not be a warmonger. It is not enough to simply have a preference for peace. Our responsibility to truth and justice does not end in our non-participation in warmongering, because the wars go on regardless. In fact, those who are responsible for keeping the wars going would much prefer that we didn’t think too hard about them. Because they know that if we thought with lucid intellectual honesty about the horrors that our civilization is unleashing upon the world every single day, we would find this entire system intolerable.

It is the responsibility of anyone who wants to be a good person, anyone who wants to be a just person, anyone who wants to be a truthful and authentic person to stand in ferocious opposition to this system. To look closely at what’s being done by your government and its allies overseas, to learn as much as you can about it, and to oppose it loudly and forcefully. This is more important than any other political agenda you could possibly fight for. If you don’t undertake it you have no basis on which to call yourself a good person, a just person, or a truthful or authentic person. You’re just another tacit facilitator.

________________________

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemitthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!

Latest comments

  • @Stephen Morrell / 27 Oct 2019
    “This is just so naive. Not all wars are the same.”

    Your Psycho-Socio-Pathetic “Just War” Plati-Babble is delusional, as Imperialist Shitlicker Puppets are the prime actuators of our Eternal War Psychopathy, a Fact eminently supportable by your trite, rabid-ribble…

    Even the Vatican has recently denounced the Unholy Roman Empire’s Just War Narrative as an eminently Shitty Excuse for Worldwide Genocidal Atrocities Diametrically Opposed (Mortal Sin) to the Judeo-Christian Peace & Love Originator’s ABSOLUTE Mandates: Thou Shalt Not Kill [period] == Make Love Not War! Regardless your own Crucifixion [period]

    Likewise, the UN defines Unlawful Aggression as Armed Force, Regardless the Reasons for the Use of Force [period]

    LOVE your enemies with Peaceful Resistance Unto Peaceful and Just Cooperation [period] is the Only Ethical and Moral Path.

    Everything Else = OxyMoronic Homo Stupidiens’ Ludicrous Idiopathy:

    ‘War Wins War’ – ‘Peaceful Resistance Causes War’ – ‘War Causes Peace’ – ‘Peace Causes Racism’ – ‘War Cures Racism’ – ‘Peace Causes Slavery’ – ‘War Narrative Ends Slavery’ – ‘Forced Conscription Causes Liberty/Freedom’ – ‘Proxy Wars Absolve Empire Liability’ – ‘Fascist Empires/Regimes can be Great’ – ‘Heinous Abe Gave a Shit For Slaves Over Union/Empire’ – ‘Viet Cong Wasn’t the Al-Qaeda Template’ – ‘A dime buys a bullet’ means the same as ‘Every dime of US War Tax Costs An Innocent Life’ – ‘Both Heinous Abe and Viet Cong Were Patriotic Heroes, not Terrorists’ – ‘Emancipation Proclamation + Civil War + Thirteenth Amendment Abolished Slavery…’

    The Only Eminently Supportable Conjecture to be derived from this Reality is: 99.9999% We The Individually Sovereign People of Earth are Suffering a Pernicious Saturation of War, Terror, Slavery, Racism and Injustice at the Profitable Pleasure of the .0001% Fascist Empiric Regimes; the Only Cure is Enlightened (Awoken) Peaceful Resistance as We Actuated To End the Viet Nam Atrocity; and the Imperialist ShitLicker, Stephen Morrell’s Karmic Consequence includes an Express Trip to Hellfire and Brimstone, the Instantaneous the Better…

  • No mention by Caitlin or any of the commenters (as far as I can see) that it is the many willing to be part of the Military & follow the orders of Politicians to do harm via “war” or war – undeclared or declared – who provide the ability of those Politicians to wage war. W/o those many in the Military – troops of whatever branch or the line support members – the Politicians could NOT wage war.Their warmongering words would be ignorable.

    Disgusted w/ wars? Don’t enlist/re-up & dissuade others. Refer those already a part of the Military to Courage to Resist: https://couragetoresist.org/

    Those willing to be Warriors make Wars possible. True defense of one’s home, family, property, friends is something entirely different from being a Warrior Wherever the Politicians/POTUS/etc order the fighting/attacking/Harm-Doing to take place.

    • Kitty, what would happen if none of our people enlisted yet the enemy still attacked? First we’d be sitting ducks, then we’d be dead ducks. In a world of polarity like this one, where negativity exists and must be faced, individuals as well as collectives MUST have a good defense. Well, the military represents that kind of defense and it is essential to our survival. How it operates is another issue altogether. Ultimately, this is the same argument people have when it comes to guns — take them out of the people’s hand so we can all be safe, they say, BUT without our own guns we’d be at the mercy of any half-cocked government out there, including our own.

    • Absolutely CORRECT.

    • I agree Kitty, from my perspective that Politicians should not command Armies.
      How to re-organise society to make that impossible?
      The French revolution had as a motto, – Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, – it was never actively effectuated, but after the first World War, Rudolf Steiner developed the idea further, as an actual division of function in Society, also describing it as Thinking. Feeling and Willing, or Spirit, Soul and Body, basically maintaining that Society should be based on the Human body, so Liberty, – Freedom, is the area of individual development, – the Arts, education, research, philosophy.
      Equality is the area of human relationships, rights, laws, politics etc.
      Faternity, or Brotherhood, (and Sisterhood) is the area of the economy, – one could argue that the economy is the management of the Earth to feed, clothe, etc. us all, in a manner that will allow that to be permanent, – you may have your own version of that.
      He further maintained that although all three functions are necessary and mutually interacting, as these three functions are in the human body, they must have their own independance required for their proper functioning, – eg you don’t expect your lungs to think.
      So this separation, unlike that in the human body, – which happens mutually and automatically, must be organised by us human beings ourselves as we have evolved/developed to the stage that that is necessary, as the older semi automatic habits are now causing major disruption/destruction.
      For example, rights are an element of the feeling sphere, property is an element of the economic sphere, therefore it is not functional for individual human beings to have a right as regards property, or any other economic element except in so far as those groups physically working in the economic sphere deem it necessary to assist the health of the earth and the life upon it.
      So if property can not be owned but only allocated to specific approved persons with the skills etc to use it as required, you can’t get multinational corporations, you can’t get spoilt rich kids inheriting factories employing millions, as the economy is managed for the best interest of all, by those with verifiably the most relevant skills.
      You also can’t get the economy controlling the Rights sphere, because the economy has no place for rights, except for say work and health safety, etc. for workers, so you can’t get politicians having any influence on the economic sphere, as they only have influence in the rights sphere.
      A good opening introduction is on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_threefolding
      It is not necessary to read the books written by Rudolf Steiner such as The Threefold Social Order, or Towards Social Renewal, nor even to buy them as they are, albeit requiring some legwork, free on certain sites.
      Nor would Steiner himself, having died in 1925, regard it as important that every idea or even most ideas, in his books should be adhered to, as they were responding to a particular time, so it is only the overall concept that is really important, although if you are prepared to wade through 100 years old German translated to English, many good nuggets may be mined, if used in context.

  • Quite right, war is the worst thing in the world. But it is not “white supremacists” driving that agenda. It is “sociopath supremacists”. By saying “white supremacists”, you are discriminating based on skin color. By saying “sociopath supremacists”, you are discriminating based on psychology and behavior. This is where discrimination is not only proper, but absolutely necessary. It is equivalent to discriminating against criminals and war-mongers. Note also that saying “sociopath supremacists” is redundant, as all sociopaths are supremacists. Identifying them as sociopaths is sufficient.

    • Since the so-called “Christ” deception, WHITE people , in the main have been raging WARS of CONQUEST and THEFT of land and resources on Brown and Black people-Think North America,South America, Australia ,Africa and WW1 and 2 etc. They even created a WHITE Jesus who was BORN in the Middle Est which is an AREA of BROWN skinned people.How did that happen??? Could it be because the creators of a White Jesus wanted to have Black and Brown people see Whites as SUPREME and DIVINE, just as the Ashkenazi Jews, as you may very well be, are doing now to Gentiles

      How many NATIONS of Brown and Black people have INVADED, backed by GUNS, WHITE Nations???

      Our Supremacist Psychopathic OWNERS are the House of Rothschild, House of Windsor and the Vatican Jesuits. How many of them are BROWN or BLACK ???

      I would suggest you have an AGENDA for disagreeing with”Kitty” and that AGENDA is NOT Truth.

  • Decent article. Wars of aggression are terrible things and must be called out. Wars of aggression are never just wars. The right to self defense is not an exclusive privilege reserved to the self-annointed.

    The trouble is, while most people prefer peace, many also want the perceived spoils of war, if not the plunder, then partisan satisfaction. The important distinction between wars of aggression and wars in self-defense are conveniently lost in self-righteous crusade memes like ‘national interest’ (read: narrow interests of an elite faction) ‘responsibility to protect’ (read: pretext for humanitarian charade) and even ‘self-defense’ (read: successful provocation).

    Too many of those who condemn war, only do so to condemn a victim”s self-defense. To be antiwar, we have to be able to call out the dishonest memes of war and the polite lies that enable wars of aggression to be embraced and defensive war condemned.

  • To the original poster:
    A) there are some things worse than war
    1) surrender without fighting for instance
    2) acquiescence to evil and so on
    B) Immigration IS war, the results are exactly the same
    C) war can be immensely satisfying, otherwise we wouldn’t do it so much
    D) I agree that our society is built on war, and that it is currently sustained by war, but only the latter in inherently bad/undesirable at the moment.

  • Have you noticed the wave of uprisings across the Globe?
    And what do all these countries – where the uprisings are occurring have in common (including Hong Kong)?
    They are under a system of global, neo-liberal/conservative (your choice) corporate, predatory capitalism (GPC).
    War is a tool of the empire to keep the GPC in place.
    We can’t eliminate war until we eliminate GPC.
    And how, pray tell, shall we do that my dear Caitlin?

  • Be sure and thank those brave men and women in uniform for their service. Without them there would be no war.

    • Eat shit

  • Putin Derangement Syndrome: Craziester and More Craziester by Patrick Armstrong
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/10/27/putin-derangement-syndrome-craziester-and-more-craziester/
    Do you check under your bed each night for the ” Evil Russians “?

  • Paul Craig Roberts was just blocked on my computer… Norton warning “Dangerous Content in the following article” and I could not continue to read!! Here we go…full blown fascism!! Is Caitlin next? Or….?? How much will we the people tolerate? If we don’t stand up for others, such as Assange, Manning, and now PCR, who will stand up for us when we need protection?? A true anti-war, pr- people’s rights’ movement, like in the 1960s, has to begin.

    • “Is Caitlin next?” Likely. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, we can do to stop Big Tech censorship, predominantly enforced against conservative and anti-establishment opinions. Will this get worse? Absolutely. Before the 2020 election, I predict that virtually every anti-establishment, anti-oligarch, anti-war and/or conservative author or content creator will have been purged from the internet. The Left learned a lesson (It thinks) from the 2016 election – “stifle ALL non-contrarian opinions” or risk Donald Trump’s re-election.

  • You know you live in a sick society when a troubled political leader stages targeted killing and promotes this on the Sunday “30 Minute Hate” shows to try for a boost in popularity.

  • The only movement that I would rank as more important, at least in Amerikkka where I reside, is a Democracy Movement. Some sort of major government, media and election reform to really make America a democracy where the people hold sovereign power.
    I say that because I long ago became convinced that without a victory on that front first, any other movement for needed change is doomed to fail. You see movements that might win a temporary victory get quickly run over by a counter attack because the system currently says that money equals power.
    When the System so strongly supports War and is intolerant to even any debate on the question, then you can not take on War without taking on The System.

    • If you hate it SOOO much and REALLY think the KKK runs the place, why not GTFO?

      • Eat shit.

  • Hmmm, from one of America’s Founders. “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
    ——-
    “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other.
    War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.
    In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.
    The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both.
    No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

    —James Madison, Political Observations, Apr. 20, 1795

    • It behooves us to remember that seventeen years after he made the above remarks, now President James Madison asked Congress for a declaration of war against England. “Free trade and sailors’ rights” was the nominal casus belli but the reality was the slaveholder faction wanted to expand “the peculiar institution” onto the land of Native Americans who were still allied with Great Britain. England had been at nearly continuous war with France since 1794, so the time seemed ripe for the “War Hawk” faction which dominated the 1810 midterm election to put their plan into action. To garner northern support they proposed the annexation of Canada to maintain the balance of slave/free states. Canadians bravely defeated the several invasion armies, and when Napoleon was finally (though temporarily) bested in 1814, Britain turned the full force of its imperial war machine on the upstart Americans who had “dared to tweak the British lion’s tail”. They crippled the US Navy and among other things sent a punitive expedition to burn Washington D.C., in retaliation for the US destruction of the Canadian capital city York (modern Toronto) the year before. Ultimately the failure of American arms was reflected in the Treaty of Ghent, which only restored the pre-war status quo, though, tragically for Native Americans, Britain withdrew its protection in return for a US promise never to try to conquer Canada again.

      The first American “peace societies” sprang up in the wake of this costly, unnecessary war. To this day that war is mythologized as a glorious “Second American Revolution,” a vivid illustration of the difference between history and what historians term “memory-history.” The former aims to present an accurate account of what actually happened (how else might we learn anything from it?), while the latter promotes an interpretation of past events that is tailored to harmonize with the psychological needs and political agendas of the powerful in the present.

  • For me, the definition of a truly left movement, or a right movement like a Libertarian one, is an opposition to war. Period.
    Thus, any movement I’ve identified with or been part of has been an antiwar movement. Both Left (Greens, anarchists, Democrat back decades ago when they had at least an anti-war faction I could support) and Right (a true Libertarian campaign like Ron Paul for President is anti-war.
    —–
    The movements that are not openly anti-war as a core position are often fake movements that aren’t really the opposition to the Radical Corporate Center that they pretend to be.
    ——–
    PEACE!, BREAD!, LAND!
    Note it begins with Peace!

  • The U.S.A. and other Allie nations are War Criminals and MIC Profiteer Offense. Terrorist$. Power to the People. PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP’s.

  • Caitlin,

    I follow and admire your work and that of other anti-war activists. But I do believe that many (most?) haven’t reached the ultimate conclusion (that I have pointed out before in the comments section here).

    I was convinced of this conclusion over ten years ago and everything since then has confirmed it further. Please, please, please take it seriously. It can only make you even more determined and confident in your judgments (in addition to clarifying (or at least giving the right starting point on) everything related to “spirituality” and “consciousness”).

    https://ia600309.us.archive.org/9/items/perennialphilosp035505mbp/perennialphilosp035505mbp.pdf

    [Page 229, last paragraph].

    I very much believe that the only strategy that will work in “saving the world” is uniting all sane persons under the umbrella of what is being said in this book (whatever the “practical role” of a person might be, an activist, a teacher, a farmer, etc). Lacking this unified umbrella, the sane persons (of whom there are fewer and fewer left) will be like the Avengers fighting alone on their own and hence losing (however much I dislike referring to inanity of a superhero movie).

    I would be so happy if you get convinced of this conclusion too and then work on uniting all the sane people you know of (in particular, all the truth-telling journalists and bloggers that we are familiar with).

    Best, Anon.

    • The power of the Left used to always be the sense of solidarity among various leftist movements. Each movement could focus on its own specialized area (and such specialization is necessary to develop expertise, positions and tactics.) But, each could also count on all the other “left” movements to show up when a call went out for “Solidarity” for a big march, protest, event, etc.
      ———–
      The “Identity Politics” movement has been a direct attack on this solidarity. I feel it is one of the ways ‘the left’ has been attacked and undermined. It creates more of an everyone-for-themselves/keep-your-hands-off-my-pie atmosphere. It allows leaders of such Identity Politics movements who have been subverted to take positions against other leftist movements under the cover of the rhetoric of Identity Politics.
      ———-
      Solidarity!

      • You are absolutely correct, Silvia. ID politics is the enemy of the people. It’s their means of dividing and conquering the masses. Most people of good character can agree on a few core issues (decentralization of wealth and power, at least to an extent , and the eliminatinon of fraud and corruption), and we could move mountains if we were able to unite, but the elites use these wedge issues to divide and distract us so that we cannot pose a serious threat to those who genuinely oppress us.

  • Of course, “we” are not in charge of the war machine. Our Overlords impose it and exact the costs from us; as long as we pay up, we’re allowed to live, shop, watch the game, glue to our phones….Complicating matters is the not so stealthy rise of the Chinese World Dictatorship: we may have taught them the game, and now, they are gearing up to beat us at it. (Read: In the shadows of the American century : the rise and decline of US global power / Alfred W. McCoy.) Emperor Xi will not play nice with us, or our Earth; he will have to be stopped by force. Remember the Nazis…anyone?

    • Hmmm, how would we spot a ‘dictatorship’?
      Perhaps stats on the prison population
      China: 1,649,804
      USA: 2,121,600
      (these are the only two nations with more than 1,000,000 in prison.
      Since China is a much more populous nation, the number of prisoners per 100,000 looks like…
      China: 118
      USA: 655 (highest in the world, and 2 other nations in the American Sphere of Influence are also in the top 10)
      Also, in the USA, 21.8% of prisoners are ‘unsentenced’. A few of the left-leaning cities that Trump despises are starting to move away from ‘cash bail’ systems where wealth is a big factor in who is in prison. When 1 in 5 prisoners are held when they haven’t even been sentenced for a crime, that is not a sign of a particularly free society and it makes a joke of phrases like “innocent until proven guilty” which should be a sign of a free society.
      And those stats are from Wikipedia which is highly and frequently edited by the western ‘deep state’.

      • Silvia,
        Amazing that Trump has made some moves to reduce this population publicly, huh?

  • Just exactly WHY are perpetual war and warmongers so attractive to US voters that they vote for them election after election? Google “ governmentcontractswon ”; go to that site and see that in 2018, “private” businesses in the state of Virgina (population 8.4 million) were awarded 324,283 contracts worth $46.4 billion and that there are 17,538 “private” DoD contractors in Virginia, and that from 2000 to 2018 “private” DoD contractors in Virginia were awarded over $733.9 billion for 936,040 contracts.
     
    Virginians’ economic well-being depends upon those DoD dollars continuing, year after year, decade after decade, literally forever. Therefore, no majority of voters in Virginia is EVER, and I do mean EVER, going to vote for a candidate, maybe like Gabbard, who might be promising to destroy Virginia’s war-based economy and destroy many well-paying jobs. They’re going to CONTINUE to vote for warmongers for POTUS and congress!
     
    Virginia is not alone in the war business. Check out what “private” DoD contractors in other states such as California receive annually. It’s mind boggling.
     
    Therefore, the US will never, and I do mean never, be politically capable of changing it’s “foreign policy” unless and until, once again with feeling, Virginians /Americans are given a detailed alternative to their present “war way” of making a living and no D or R candidate is spelling out such an alternative.
     
    But there is still a faint glimmer of hope.
     
    Trump proved that a complete political outsider could/can “go around” the MIC and be elected. Trump paid a helluva price when he shook hands with Putin in Helsinki. That summit proved that the US MSM is also an MIC tool and that the MIC’s pockets are very deep — in fact, infinitely deep.
     
    Antiwar candidates can be elected, but if they are elected, just like Trump they’ll be fighting the MSM and civil service and intelligence deep state every day of their political lives, which does not make for a very nice way of life for those politicians’ families. This is why a majority of congress must also be real anti-war so that they can support each other as a bloc against the unelected deep state.
     
    Present reality is that politicians are selected by voters every two or four years. None of these politicians are going to change absolutely anything about the election system or rules of campaign financing (bribery). Therefore, to stop the MIC and change the US’s war-based economy, antiwar candidates must somehow get elected within that very same system. If that does not happen, the US is doomed to suffer financial or nuclear destruction.
     
    Further, if the US cannot develop an economic system that does NOT absolutely depend upon perpetual population/economic growth, humanity will certainly suffer an environmental disaster. (IMO, designing and implementing such an alternative economic system will be far more difficult than getting antiwar POTUS and congress people elected, which is really saying something. When people cannot even agree upon the meanings of words as a vitally necessary first step, this may simply be a bridge too far for the supposedly most intelligent species on the planet.)
     
    Again, for the present moment, here in reality-land, at least the number of voters who voted for Agent Orange have to somehow be enticed into voting for an anti-war candidate for POTUS AND a majority of anti-war candidates running for seats in the legislative branch. THAT is the one and the ONLY way that the MIC is going to go away.
     
    How do antiwar candidates “entice” millions of voters all across the 50 United In Warfare States Of America, who make their living in the MIC or its spin-offs, into voting for these anti-war candidates? THAT is THE question, not whether “to be or not to be?” If those candidates can not be elected, the US, and perhaps all the other nations of the world, are not going “to be” for much longer.
     
    To entice those MIC etc. voters, those anti-war candidates are going to have to promise that if they are elected they are going to MAINTAIN the present DoD contract system, so that these millions of voters WILL NOT lose their jobs; but their jobs will be to produce all the great things that will improve the lives of all their fellow citizens. And by “improve” I mean that instead of making military aircraft that will in a few years end up sitting in a boneyard, they will make, for just one example, wind turbines, solar panels, bullet trains, etc. The services or electric power from these devices would not be “free”, just as the weapon systems of today are not free.
     
    Which would millions of voters enjoy more, the benefit they receive from weapon systems, or electric power, a trip across the country in an electric-powered bullet train, etc.? How would millions of voters feel about the US becoming energy independent in very few years of spending under a slightly-altered DoD contract system? If I were an anti-war candidate, I would propose to millions of voters that the nation create another “Liberty Ship” program (again, under the existing DoD contract system).
     
    Liberty Ships were the workhorses of World War II. They were built in 13 states by 15 companies in 18 shipyards. The first of 2,710 Liberty ships, the SS Patrick Henry, was launched in September 1941, after 150 days of construction. (The shipyard was built at the same time as the ship.) Under this highly automated ship-building system, the SS Robert E. Peary liberty ship was built in 4 Days 15 Hours 29 Minutes.
     
    These were not small boats, not by a long shot. Here are some specifications.
    Displacement: 14,245 long tons (14,474 t)[2]
    Length: 441 ft 6 in (134.57 m)
    Beam: 56 ft 10.75 in (17.3 m)
    Draft: 27 ft 9.25 in (8.5 m)
    Propulsion: Two oil-fired boilers; triple-expansion steam engine; single screw, 2,500 hp (1,900 kW)
    Range: 20,000 nmi (37,000 km; 23,000 mi)
    Capacity: 10,856 t (10,685 long tons)
     
    Again, in just a few years of assembly-line development, one of these vessels was assembled in only 4 Days 15 Hours 29 Minutes. Imagine such an assembly line system for relatively simple wind turbines, bullet trains, vehicles of all types, etc.
     
    THIS is what anti-war candidates have to promise those millions of voters in the MIC in order to capture their votes. THIS is precisely what Gabbard and other anti-war candidates have to start proposing TODAY, not 6 months down the road. If she were to do this today, she would start a firestorm of a debate, which is precisely what is needed to shake up the present arrangement. Does she have the intellectual wherewithal and “courage” to do this? We will soon find out, but I expect that she does not. But unless anti-war candidates specifically propose such a detailed transition from a war-based economy to one based upon peace, they will NOT be elected and the US MIC’s perpetual wars will go on until the nukes start dropping.
     
    The above is the one and the only realistic, practical, POLITICALLY ACCEPTABLE way that humanity has a future. But will capitalists be as eager to increase the national debt for peace as they are for war?

    • And where does the trillions of debt for war systems end up?

    • Great posts, Ish. Agree 100% with what you’ve said here. We cannot dismantle the war machine without finding a palatable (and socially beneficial) replacement. Our economy is too dependent on it.

  • “Damn you masters of war.”
    B. Dylan

    • Fantastic song. Such passion in the lyrics. Sad to say events keep reminding me of it.

      Here’s a cool version by Ed Sheeran:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bReiBl6J-Lo

      “You might say that I’m young,
      you might say I’m unlearned,
      but there’s one thing I know,
      though I’m younger than you,
      that even Jesus would never forgive what you do.”
      -Masters of War by Bob Dylan

  • Avoid the bombed city
    for there is but one reality
    to war and this is it —
    blasted stone and the
    charred bones of those
    who wanted war and
    those who didn’t.

    Han Shan (c 800) Chinese poet

  • Call it whatever you want but a war is still just a fight on a grand scale. The intention behind wars is fundamentally a forceful means for getting your own way. In this sense, we are each guilty of engaging in warring tactics every time we fight with another person, and that includes nasty comments aimed at strangers in on-line forums. The only way to even begin stopping wars out there is to grasp why we ever have the need to force other people to agree with us at all. Why, for instance, do we maintain certainty in our rightness and yet so insecure with other differing perspectives that we strike out in response rather than engage in friendly discussion? Why shriek with frustrated intent when it is that much more productive to communicate preferences calmly, however much it contradicts. And yet…

    Fighting is not something OUT THERE that other people do that we find disturbing –it just isn’t– it’s an argumentativeness in our thinking patterns that we fail to take responsibility for, which we then deny and project out onto individuals as well as the world at large. If we, for instance, are unable to stop from engaging others antagonistically, dismissively, sarcastically, etc.. then we must understand that THAT is the standard have we set for ourselves, and therefore the world at large. As standards go, then what we see occurring OUT THERE is a reflection of what is actually going on in our own mental landscapes. Hence, if we are to change the outer landscape we must first see the inner one very clearly and understand why we do it. With some life experience under our belts, all of us begin to see that just because actual blood isn’t flowing from our verbal spats, for example, doesn’t mean that our selected words and intentions can’t be just as cutting and hurtful as are knives, guns, and bombs. Therefore, it is fair to say that the world we see out there is but a reflection of the way we are habitually interacting with each other in our personal lives: because what we think about a specific person will ultimately set our intention, and our intention will select the words we speak, be they calming or damaging. In other words, the end result BEGINS with the amount of respect we are willing to give to the other person in the first place.

    Essentially, while most of us may actively abhor war out there, very few of us can say we are actually above it in our own personal lives. Truly, if we are still fighting with other people in any way, then we are not above it. The only way to stop wars from spilling out onto the OUTER battlefield of life requires a concerted effort to see inside your own mindset where the tendency to be contentious and resentful resides. This means noticing also the times when we argue with others inside our own heads! There are gentler ways of being heard and of being satisfied and it begins with, believe it or not, SELF-RESPECT. Many people argue for respect, yet it never occurs to them that the ONLY person that really needs to respect them is THEY themselves so that they no longer need to engage others from the standpoint of conviction and judgment. Ultimately, each person who makes a thorough inventory and adjustment of their inner mental landscape eventually succeeds at shifting out of any world timeline that is actively an expression of being at war with self.

    • Demitra, I call all of it ” Nonsense ” and I immediately walk away from it because nothing can be accomplished by trying to deal with uncivilized people. Every person has the right to their own personal opinions; however many human beings refuse to accept anything or anyone not sharing their opinions. Such is one of the many dysfunctional traits of being a human being.

  • This little video speaks volumes. There really is a quiet movement swelling up with the people on this planet to turn this bloody mess around. Now is the time to spread our voices and inspire by our actions and awareness https://youtu.be/xQucpAdsApw

  • Not to mention that WAR is the number one factor that is standing in the way of ecological progress. No point in green energy, planting trees, cleaning the oceans – they are all just feel-good projects that will matter not a whit unless WAR IS FIRST STOPPED EVERYWHERE.

  • When I mention America warmongering to my fellow US citizens, they just give me a weird stare and change the subject. You are right, we only care about ourselves as long as we doesn’t affect me, then do as you like.

  • If all you can do is make or buy a t-shirt, do so. A good conversation starter.

  • “I gather that libertarians and other right-leaning anti-interventionists often encounter a similar deprioritization of sane foreign policy.”

    Yes.
    I was active in an Australian supposedly-libertarian-oriented party, and expressed the view that Israeli/Zionist aggression by taking Palestinian land with force was unacceptable.
    .
    You would think that those who supposedly espouse the “non-aggression principle”, which is supposedly a cornerstone of libertarian philosophy would agree with that stance.
    Well, most I discussed the subject with did not agree with my perspective.

    • In the US there is usually a big difference between large L libertarians (Libertarian Party) and small l libertarians. Large L libertarians think they can make the change by working within a totally corrupted system, which corrupts them.

  • The patriotic role is defending our troops against this filthy, rotten, warmongering fascist government.

  • perhaps comments could be linked rather than just braying?

  • As a white male, I’m so sick of hearing how we have “muh white privilege”. Its absolute garbage. It does not exist and it’s a tool used to shame us into having white guilt. Go to Japan, China, or Saudi Arabia and tell them they have “privilege”. In America being white has only worked against me. We are the only group actively and openly discriminated against. We get mo no public benefits, despite paying the most into them. We get no affirmative action, despite making laws to help others. Its total garbage and needs to stop. Every person prefers their in group and that’s a part of being human. This is why I hate progressives and why I hate this modern “liberal” world. We are worse off than our parents and even far worse off than our grandparents and our children will suffer from this cultural Marxism garbage.

    • I have to agree (as another white male). I love virtually everything Caitlin writes, I like her style, I like the way she focuses on anti-war and anti-oligarchies, in particular, but I had to stop reading this piece when I reached “white supremacy.” There is no such thing in the real world, no matter how much the Left tries to ram it down our throats. They use the phrase and the idea as a cudgel to advance their identity politics agenda, an agenda that is helping to destroy our social fabric, such as it is. Thanks for bringing this to the comment section; I was thinking I was the only one who reacted the way I did.

      • Danged right – both Joe and Frank – this white supremacy crap immediately turned me off on this piece – which I was about to archive in my library, as I have many others by her.
        What is it where someone can see so many things clearly but then is freaking blind to something staring her in DaFace?

  • Brilliant.

  • Interesting,
    I don’t pretend to have the answers but Noam Chomsky does makes sense.

    “The point of public relations slogans like “Support Our Troops” is that they don’t mean anything … that’s the whole point of good propaganda. You want to create a slogan that nobody is going to be against and I suppose everybody will be for, because nobody knows what it means, because it doesn’t mean anything. But its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something, do you support our policy? And that’s the one you’re not allowed to talk about.”
    Noam Chomsky

    What is it that any of us want from these corrupt politicians so badly that we vote for them and then we have no access to our own humanity

  • This is just so naive. Not all wars are the same. Wars of liberation from imperialism, for example, are just and fully supportable. All anti-imperialists had a side in the US’s war on Vietnam, for example — that side was with the heroic National Liberation Front (‘Viet Cong’) and for the defeat of the US imperialists. A common slogan of the anti-Vietnam war movement was ‘A dime buys a bullet’ (for the NLF).

    Anyone not for the military defeat of the imperialist war machine in all its theatres of operation and is for peace at all costs, lacks a sense of justice and empathy for the oppressed and victims, and for those locked in a life-and-death armed struggle against the imperialist war machine. Such pacifism smacks of psychopathia.

    Closer to the imperial centre, if all wars were ‘bad’, then the American civil war wasn’t worth fighting either. The so-called ‘pacifists’ and draft resisters on the northern side in the American civil war were actually pro-slavery. And anyone taking the side of justice and progress in that conflict of course would have encouraged draft resistance and ‘pacifism’ on Confederate side, and defended draconian measures taken against such on the northern side.

    Abe Lincoln sending in the militia to quell the New York anti-draft riots of July 1863 was eminently supportable, even if the measure was late and inadequate. Mainly of working class Irish descent who feared blacks taking their jobs and couldn’t afford the $300 to pay for a substitute, the New York anti-draft rioters quickly turned their uprising into an anti-black pogrom, so much so that most of the blacks living in southern Manhattan moved to Brooklyn.

    So if war “…is worse than economic injustice…. racism….. sexism…. homophobia and transphobia…. draconian drug policies and immigration policies”, then nothing is worth fighting for if war at some point actually is needed to win. All such an outlook achieves is allow social horrors to persist at the ‘pleasure of the rulers’, and gives the lie to “Simply choosing not to participate in a grave injustice while giving it our tacit permission to continue is insufficient,…”

    That’s where this ‘pure’ kind of pacifism leads to. By renouncing in advance the possible necessity of civil war is to say to the rulers, ‘we’ll oppose you up to a certain point, but would never contemplate waging war against you, even if needed, so don’t worry’ — simply gives them permission to carry on as before. That’s surrender.

    • Yes, but the wars we have got going on right now are not wars against injustice. They are wars of sneaky imperialism.

      • There’s plenty of injustice in ‘sneaky imperialism’. And there’s a side: for the Houthis against the Saudi kingdom and its US and Israeli henchmen who are causing a massive humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen; for the Syrian government and Russians against the US-armed and now Turkish-run ISIS; for anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan who inflicts some damage on the imperial occupiers there.

        In short, imperialist ‘interventions’, sneaky or otherwise, are all about plunder of resources, repression, and economic or hot warfare against countries that won’t toe the line — injustice.

    • Caitlin was not opposing defence, she was opposing offence — making war.

      • Agree with Rigby. There is a huge difference between defensive and offensive war. I’m very strongly anti-war — it’s my #1 issue — but I fully support having a strong military so that we can readily and effectively defend ourselves here at home.
        …………………..

        We also have to be careful about “good guy” and “bad guy” labels. Not everyone agrees on the same definitions, and any attempt to unilaterally apply a good/bad label on another group needs to be viewed very skeptically (see the history of U.S. wars). People who choose to stay out of wars that don’t have a clear predator/prey profile are often wise, not lazy/fearful/stupid/complicit/etc.

        • An example of a war with no good guys: none of the ‘great powers’ was supportable in the inter-imperialist conflagration of WWI which essentially was manufactured by Britain to destroy a rising Germany. It was preferable for all the imperialists to lose that war, and the only appropriate attitude was one of ‘revolutionary defeatism’ — with slogans like ‘Turn the guns the other way, the main enemy is at home; and ‘Turn the imperialist war into a civil war’ (Lenin). Regardless of who started it.

        • Defend “Ourselves” from whom?

          • From those who would want to attack us and/or take our resources.

            • And just whom would that be? Al Queda? Libya? Yemen? Venezuela? Viet Nam? Grenada?

          • Bob, it would be none of those. Again, I am 100% opposed to wars of aggression. In demanding respect for our sovereignty, I demand respect for the sovereignty of others.

        • Well, it was famously said: ‘The best DEfense is a good OFfense.’ The two sort of slide together, don’t they? I don’t think things are as simple as people want to make them out to be.

    • Apparently you are clueless about the “Civil” war, also more correctly known as The War of Northern Aggression. There was nothing civil about it, other than being the first war in which a western military directly attacked the civilian population of their enemy, a tactic now common. The Confederate States made no attempt to overthrow the government of the United States, so it was not a civil war by any accepted definition. They simply wanted a divorce, AKA self determination. Lincoln’s stated sole objective was to preserve the union by force. Slavery is evil, and its end was a welcome byproduct, but not one that Lincoln had any desire for. He intended to deport all blacks. Your justification of conscription is contradictory to your objection to slavery, since there is no difference between the two. After killing more than 650k people, a great many of them civilians, the end result of the War of Northern Aggression is as bad or worse than slavery. It gave us the tyrannical centralized violent government we now have, which has made slaves of us all, and the imperialism, death and destruction the world has suffered from it. Imposition of one’s beliefs on another is NOT a justification for violence, only violence in defense against such aggression is.

      • Articulately stated JWK. Your last sentence: ” Imposition of one’s beliefs on another is NOT a justification for violence, only violence in defense against such aggression is. ” sums it all up perfectly!

      • Playing with words to support the Confederacy doesn’t change the nature of the American civil war. Firstly, a large component of the American Revolution against the British was about keeping slavery because the British by then were against the slave trade (not necessarily slavery itself), even though throwing off the British yoke was supportable. The wars against Mexico were about territorial plunder and extending slavery, and not supportable. Slavery is part of America’s DNA and was the secret to the ‘primitive accumulation’ stage of capital formation in the US.

        ‘Self-determination’ — how ludicrous: The southern planters wanted to maintain slavery under the rubric of ‘states rights’, and when they couldn’t keep up that facade they wanted secession. Such ‘fine’ words as ‘self determination’ can’t cover the fact this was a war for their right to determine the lives and fates of ‘their’ slaves. The southern plantation owners didn’t constitute any separate ‘nation’ based on a separate culture or language, for example.

        Of course Lincoln’s initial impetus was to maintain the union and not about eliminating slavery, but economically and socially the civil war was all about chattel slavery, and he eventually realised and was forced to accept that. The northern bourgeoisie was no longer willing to allow the southerners to continue their supreme economic advantage of slave labour, to accumulate capital and wealth faster than them and at their expense.

        Who fires the first shots and ‘aggression’ has nothing to do with which side, if any, to take in a war. That moral canard is the basis for all false-flag operations to win popular support for war.

        Playing with the word ‘civil’ about how barbaric war is doesn’t change the distinctions between different wars. All war is horrible but some wars are absolutely necessary and require taking a side, and the American civil war is no exception.

        Finally, equating chattel slavery with military conscription is specious. One is an established system of political economy operating in peacetime, under ‘normal’ conditions. The other an exceptional temporary measure to wage war. And at present, the world lives under a system of wage slavery. But given the disgraceful social conditions of the US, there is also considerable economic conscription into the US organised murder machine, and that’s not so exceptional.

        • Lincoln had a Hegelian vision of the state, which, since the state is war, comports poorly with the idea of universal peace. The kind of state we have now in the US is the logical outcome of his vision. Lincoln would say in his defense, I suppose, that it is better than anything else we are likely to get, considering warfare has been a constant practice of humans since before they were human. In any case the Confederacy was an anachronism, as is proved by its fetishization of personal chattel slavery — something like having Saudi Arabia on your doorstep.

          I think Lincoln could be given an argument, but the argument would have to include some recognition of the tragic necessity for humans to turn against some of their deepest instincts, one of which is to gather in small groups and kill one another, a result of our difficult evolution. I suppose. The contradiction is manifest right in this discussion: ‘War is bad, except sometimes.’ Also note the subjects of our large-scale narrative art, starting with the Iliad.

          For the present I would just like people to get the idea that they don’t _have_ to carry on war constantly, all the time, against people who are in no way threatening them. You’d think that would be a no-brainer, but the only presidential candidate who is pushing that idea is polling at 1 to 2%.

    • “the American civil war wasn’t worth fighting either. The so-called ‘pacifists’ and draft resisters on the northern side in the American civil war were actually pro-slavery.”

      False. The war was explicitly entered into by the North with the statement that it was NOT a war to end slavery. That’s why four of the Union states that were slave states chose the North. That’s why the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the Confederacy and not to those four states. That’s why a slave owner (Grant) received the surrender of a man who’d manumitted all his family’s slaves at the war’s end.

      The US could have purchased every slave in the south for less money than the war cost if ending slavery was its goal. The transatlantic slave trade had been banned for generations by that point.

      The Confederacy offered abolition in exchange for Britain’s help in the war and was rebuffed. The war was first and foremost about keeping the Northern empire together.

      • At the time, the Unionist argument was that breaking up the Union would lead to yet further civil wars and race wars, and I think that was a good guess. One is confronted with the contradiction that large states often seem to reduce the amount of state business (war, policing, oppression, bureaucracy, and so on). For example, the breaking-up of the large European empires led directly to a great many small wars and finally another very big war. A dilemma for us anarchistic types.

      • It would be preferable and less misleading if you quoted me properly, as in “Closer to the imperial centre, if all wars were ‘bad’, then the American civil war wasn’t worth fighting either.” Otherwise you give the impression that I thought the civil war not worth fighting.

        I made no claim that the northerners waged the war to end slavery per se. But that’s what the war was all about. Yes, there were all manner of contradictions in the war and among its key actors. Or the fact that slaves also fought on the side of the Confederacy. None of this gets around the fact that the north, regardless of the motives of its leaders, was on the right side of progress and history.

  • Dear Caitlin,
    My fave quote of all time, courtesy of Edmund Burke: “All it takes for the triumph of evil is for good men to stand by and do nothing.”
    Best,
    horror/thriller author S.A. Hogan

  • No More War

  • War is the worst. Wars based on bullshit, the American way, are the worse of the worse.

    Billions of people on this planet hate America for the millions of innocents they have killed since WW2.

  • I’ve had the ‘unusual’ experience of living in two war zones.
    West Belfast during the 4 decade long urban and rural guerilla war against the Brits occupying the 6 counties of Ireland and in Mozambique when the near by apartheid regime tried to over throw the popular, revolutionary government in Mozambique.
    Once you’ve seen, smelled and tasted war unless your a psychopath or sociopath you become extremely anti war.
    One of the primary drivers of the 6th great extinction is the warmongering from the corporations and military industrial complex and the responses from the more independent nations who are singled out.
    The emissions from these criminals are grinding the living planet into dust.
    https://kevinhester.live/2018/11/26/militarisms-role-in-the-sixth-and-possibly-last-great-extinction/

  • Great essay, Caitlin, and a very important one. However, I would like to add a little … what … “nuance”? (Taking into account some of the forum comments.)

    First, three relevant quotes that I like, and have at hand:

    + “Qui tacet consenter videture” (Old Roman phrase)

    + “Silence in the face of evil is evil itself.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer

    + “Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer

    We do NOT all have the same interests and abilities (including “time”), so I generally think it recommendable to suggest that folks apply their “efforts for good” in the manner that suits their personal interests and abilities (while pointing out that a “persistent effort” can be effective, even if it is in small bits at a time).

    Having said THAT, however, I add that it is good for the person with “large-scale interests” (such as war and environment) to also pay a little attention to matters on the other, smaller, social-levels. In the same way, it is good for the person with relatively “small-scale interests” (such as the functioning of the local “water district”, etc.) to pay at least a little attention to the “big picture” stuff.

    Some of my aphorisms:

    + To the extent that we are able, it is probably best if everyone tried to “be informed, be active, and be organized”.

    + We try to “do what is right” because that is the “right thing to do”, eh?

    + We don’t know what the future holds for us, so with that uncertainty, there is yet some reason for optimism.

    We, each and every one of us, need to at a minimum, somehow SHOW that we are opposed to war (and for a livable environment, etc.). If nothing else, a relevant bumper-sticker, lapel-pin, or yard-sign is a way to fulfill our “minimum moral obligation” to the world. We don’t know if we will “change” anything for the better with our efforts, but at least we do not “look” like we support the status quo … when we most certainly do NOT!

    Yes? No?

    • Oh, and I’ll add that, because we can’t know what lies ahead in the future, we also should “prepare ourselves” for a door-of-opportunity, for positive action. What I mean is, there may not be much that we can DO right now, that is effective, but if we remain open to possibilities, a “door” could open at any time. Keep looking for such an “opening”. (While positively showing to the public, somehow, where you stand on major issues.)

    • Your quotes reminded me of one, which I can’t remember the attribution for:
      “To know, and not to do, is not to know.”

      • https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/to_know_and_not_to_do_is_not_to_know

        Entry from March 31, 2010
        “To know and not to do is not to know”

        “To know and not to do is not to know” has been credited to Chinese philosopher Wang Yangming (1472-1529). The phrase appears cited with frequency in English from 1977, and has been a Wall Street proverb since the 1980s. Consumer activist Raph Nader often used the phrase, calling it an “anicient Chinese saying.”

        

Wikipedia: Wang Yangming 
Wang Yangming (王陽明, 1472–1529) was a Ming Chinese idealist Neo-Confucian philosopher, official, educationist, calligraphist and general. After Zhu Xi, he is commonly regarded as the most important Neo-Confucian thinker, with interpretations of Confucianism that denied the rationalist dualism of the orthodox philosophy of Zhu Xi. He was known as Yangming Xiansheng or Yangming Zi (both mean “Brilliant Master Yangming”) in literary circles.

  • Almost every sentence a paragraph of truthful logic and sledge hammer wisdom, Ms Johnstone! A glorious treasure to read and reprint. Not only is war the most evil act of humanity; war is just plain stupid. Unfortunately the average United States citizen does not want to see or hear about the evil ways of our government; they prefer to ignore the reality of the truth for the simplicity of delusion. When war comes directly to them and for them; they will still not understand that they brought it upon themselves.

  • The USA is finally doing something to create a better tomorrow check-out;
    https://www.mintpressnews.com/william-barr-formally-announces-orwellian-pre-crime-program/262504/

  • You’re absolutely correct Caitlin. I’m surrounded by people that are kind, and take care of one another, but when it comes to the wars we wage, they don’t feel responsible. Partly because they don’t know what awful things are done in our name and when you try to inform them, they just can’t believe it.

    It is encouraging that when Tulsi goes on the national stage and tells the truth about our wars, she is the most goggled candidate. People want to know more. They are not accepting that she is spouting conspiracy theories. There are people out there raging against our wars, but right now Tulsi has the loudest megaphone. And that is why many anti-war conservatives and libertarians are supporting her. I have heard many of them say that they disagree with her on domestic issues, but lets get behind her and get the MIC war-mongers under control and then we can fight about everything else afterwards.

  • I agree, Caitlin, with your basic premise, I have a black book-keeper, black assistance with anything I can’t do, prefer black company and black parties, – more fun, – I believe that Black people Community is far superior to white ‘community,’ – I acknowledge the damage that alcohol has on cutures just introduced to alcohol as opposed to cultures that have been consuming alcohol for thousands of years, but in Australia, very few black people end up in nursing homes, “they,” have much to teach “us”, but, I believe that Global Warming is a far greater danger than war, – War may kill most of us, but Global Warming could kill all of us and all our environments.
    Of course these things are linked, war is a distraction by the super rich so people lose sight of global warming, and the machineries of war require huge consumption of Global Warming fossil fuels, but when significant damage from Global Warming occurs it will dwarf anything other than a total World War, but even then the aftermath of such an event may leave survivors but severe Global Warming, the which such a global war will only exacerbate, will probably leave no survivors at all.

  • I like the spirit, but what are the actions prescribed. If February 15 203 wasn’t good enough what will be?

  • Sorry, but having the time, energy, and financial resources and social support to spend on fighting against the war machine indicates a high level of privilege that relatively few people enjoy. That does not mean that a person who doesn’t cannot be “a good person, a just person, or a truthful or authentic person”, just that they have more immediate personal issues that require their attention. Far too many are actual refugees from devastating wars, or simply people struggling to earn enough to support themselves and their families. Even many of us who do have the privilege to be able to focus on larger issues can be limited by geography, financial resources and other obligations to do much directly.

    • Hi Valley Cat; What a cop out. Now is the time to make a stand, if you are not a moral coward. By doing as you cowardly advocate the most evil folks in the world win and winning at this juncture will spell the end of hope, life and future. No More war. No More Nuclear Weapons.

      Love & Peace form Oregon

      • I think you should also suggest concrete, material actions a person of ordinary means can take in the present to follow the course you recommend, especially if you can give examples from personal experience. Many people think they are opposed to war as a default foreign policy, but don’t think they can do anything about it. Show them otherwise.

  • “Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11” and “Exposing NIST Jenga Game” both at > VeteransToday(.)com
    The false flag starter for all war in the 21st is blatantly obvious, staged nuclear vaporization. Expose this lie and we destroy the duplicitous media, the M.I.C. pirates and the demonic bankers who direct this carnage. End feudalism now.

  • As usual it’s another “Dead Balls On” piece by Caitlin.
    Only thing missing is:
    #TULSI
    #TULSI2020
    #OnceYouGoGabbardYouNeverGoBack

leave a comment